The EU Should Rethink it's Migration Policy, and Open the Borders

By: India Abbott, 18 year old student currently at school in Brussels. Follow me @india_valentina

The European Union is facing its worst migrant crisis since
the end of the Second World War. Troubles in Africa, war in Syria and Iraq and
chaos in Libya have stimulated an exodus of refugees, who are trying to escape
violence, persecution and poverty. But this vast movement of people has created
multiple problems: “stretching economic resources, radicalizing politics and
straining the post-war institutions created to keep the continent at peace and
whole”. Is the European Union’s migration policy defunct, or is it more a
question of changing humanitarian and public opinion?

The European Union’s migration policy is based on the Dublin
II regulation (reformed in June 2013), which seeks to determine the member
state responsible for an asylum seeker who enters the EU (generally this is the
first country the asylum seeker enters) and on the Schengen agreement (1995),
which promotes the free movement of European citizens. Today, these rulings are
considered outdated: “the rules, known as the Dublin regulation and dating from
the 1990s, are widely viewed as dysfunctional and were abandoned…” and Dmitry
Medvedev, Russia’s prime minister, says that “the European Union’s immigration
policy is a failure and was the greatest mistake made”. The Dublin II
regulation particularly weighs on the EU’s southern states as migrants
primarily enter the EU by the Mediterranean. The EU has therefore been pushed
to spend money on the redistribution of people, rehabilitation programs and
emergency funding for “front line” member states such as Italy and Greece. To
avoid this heavy spending, the migration policy must be rethought.

To prevent the migration of refugees, many member states
have modified their open-border policy and are exercising a closed-border
policy instead (for example, Hungary has built an insurmountable wall), and the
Union has been advised to augment the amount of security around its already
closed external borders: “the governments must equally find the courage to get
security, even military, measures, to effectively close the outside borders of
the Union”. Many governments are opposed to a common policy between member
states: the Hungarian government has said “migration policies… should be
handled at the state level” as it is the citizens that “need to give their
consent to receiving migrants”. This satisfies the European populations that
“fear that local norms, customs and values could be overwhelmed by an influx of
migrants” and who think that “social and political stability in Europe won’t survive
the flood of millions of additional migrants coming from Africa and the Near
East”. It is also noted that “opinion polls show very little support for
accepting migrants across the region”. The European population has a negative
perception of asylum seekers and other migrants due to terrorist attacks: “the
war in Syria… henceforth exports migrants and terrorism in Europe” and
incidents such as that of Cologne, and due to the media which claims that
migrants will profit from social aid (for example the benefits system in
England and Sweden), which is pushing the EU to rethink its border policy.

However, the influx won’t end: “restrictive policies don’t
dissuade the migrants to try and get to our continent. The only force them to
choose more dangerous journeys”. In fact, the number of migrants from 2014 to
2015 has increased by 164%. The EU is therefore forced to spend more money on
agencies that protect external borders, such as Frontex’s Triton and Poseidon,
whose funding has been tripled, in order to keep an eye on and save people who
try to cross the Mediterranean. It is also forced to spend more money on
investigating criminal networks.

Meanwhile, the complete closing of borders would be the
beginning of the end for Schengen and the Union: “Decisive unilateral actions
to secure national borders… an end to the common European area” which would be
bad for the European economy but also completely immoral because we would have
the deaths of thousands of people on our conscience. But, for some governments,
it’s the best solution… You see, governments would rather not help migrants as
much as they can; for example, fifteen member states have pledged 1,081 places
for the rehabilitation of 66,400 stuck in Greece – only 218 places have been
assigned.

In my opinion, the EU has to be less flexible with its
quotas and the sovereignty of its member states regarding borders, as too much
flexibility has resulted in more difficulties and more tensions. Dmitry
Medvedev says “the EU is incapable of stopping the “snowball effect” of
migration because it does not have a coordinated position among the member
states”. Primarily, however, I don’t think it’s the migratory policy that’s the
problem, but more the European people and their empathy. For example, the page
“Humans of New York” interviewed many refugees and its audience therefore
became more aware of the horrific situations refugees find themselves in. An
alarming generosity followed, many people giving donations and money to help
the refugees. Showing the reality of life
in Syria via witness accounts, and talking about the positive aspects of
migration (an able work force, a young demographic, cultural diversity and
qualified migrants that can help the economy and ameliorate the standard of
living of European populations) can drive a much more empathetic reaction than
that of biased reports that only show negative aspects of migration.
Historically, Europe has been a continent where populations have migrated from
one country to another to avoid war, conflict, poverty, etc. Our politicians
should remember this from time to time.

The EU Should Rethink it's Migration Policy, and Open the Borders
Reviewed by Unknown
on
13:48
Rating: 5